Feet Follow Fabric II: Understanding the Power of “Eyes on the Street”

[Intro: This slide show — only one photo and no graphics — was “presented” to an on-line conference in the fall of 2011 to commemorate World Planning Day. I don’t know how to transfer to this site, other than after ‘translating’ to my Wordperfect program. I finally did this in 2017 while preparing a walk narrative for the national conference of Mensa people at Carleton University. The organizers approached Jane’s Walk organizer, Leigh Thorpe, for a walk on this particular street near campus, Preston Street, Ottawa “Little Italy” and the only main street with light-rail running along its entire length, albeit with only two stations and set almost a block to the west. The topic: Perspective on City Planning Fifty years back and ahead.]

Feet Follow Fabric:
Understanding How “Eyes on the Street” Works

Presentation by Chris Bradshaw, to the On-line World Planning Day Conference, November 1, 2011 (hearth@ties.ottawa.on.ca)
slide 2:

Jane Jacobs’ Legacy of “Eyes” The components (from The Death and Life of Great American Cities, slide 35)

In other words, natural surveillance.
She also identified what features contributes to it:

Buildings facing the street
1. Clear demarcation between the public and private lands
2. Busy sidewalks
3. The “eyes” . . . “must belong to those we might call the natural proprietors of the street.”
4. Good lighting (slide 36)
5. Active and “flush” storefronts (2000 speech in Washington) (transcribed from tape by speaker)

slide 3:

Crime: Reducing the Opportunity: “Eyes” inhibit crime

○ The crime doesn’t necessarily move elsewhere; the inclusiveness of street life can prevent the attitudes of predation and anger/resentment.

○ Does the walking of dogs – a great generator trips outdoors, especially ‘after hours’ – have its own role in inhibiting crime?

slide 4

Both Inside and Outside Buildings: The eyes – and ears – belong to both those outside the buildings, as well as those inside.

○ Those outside looking at each other
○ Occupants (residents & employees of business) watching each others’ houses/yards
○ Those outside watching residents
○ Those inside watching those outside. Street as “theatre”

○ Noticing that something is wrong
○ Caring about harm may come to people and to the place if intervention doesn’t occur.
○ A willingness/knowledge to act

slide 6

Additional Dynamics of Life in Public Areas

○ The “raised eyebrow” indicates displeasure to outsiders
○ Part of “people watching” is making up stories about the people one sees, especially couples (Engwicht 1993)
○ Games are popular (tables support checkers, etc.; a larger area supports frisbee circle)
○ “Hanging out” with friends (social networking)
○ Some want to be alone
○ One of Ray Oldenberg’s “Third Places” (1993)

slide 7

Are all eyes equal?

○ Motorists’ eyes are only “part-time,” distracted by responsibilities of driving
○ The residents living above street level offer another perspective
○ ‘Locals’ know history of area; know who to call for action/repair.
○ Children don’t see as much, but are attractors of others’ eyes.

○ Jacobs had in mind mostly crime that ‘eyes’ would inhibit, day and night (security).
○ But there is also a equal fear of traffic collisions, especially pedestrian-vehicle (safety). Ottawa professor has create Walking Security Index’
○ In Abraham Maslov’s “hierarchy of needs,” security of person and one’s valuables (home and employment) ranked 2nd of five in importance.

slide10

Danger is Not Democratic

○ The automobile is not an equalizer, but rather gives those with a car more power than those without (endangerers and endangerees)
○ Planning is done for AAAs (active, affluent adults). But about half are ‘PED-CIVs’ (Poor, Elderly, Disabled, Children, Ill/infirm, Visitors, ‘Simplicists’)
○ Car-dependency not only increases safety fears for PED- CIVs, but reduces the quality of choices.
○ Speed is major component of injuries. Doubling of speed quadruple injuries and chance of death.

○ The “fabric” consists of the “desire lines” linking any set of “eyes” to any other point.
○ “Feet follow fabric” refers to the ability of the feet to follow its eyes.
○ What degrades fabric is motor traffic above a certain speed, vacant lots, fences near street
○ Car-dependency, and the sprawl it induces, hurts community commitment; each 10 mins. of commuting = 10% less. (Putnam, slide 213)

slide 12

Fabric – 2

○ Appleyard & Lintell analyzed three similar streets with different amounts traffic. The low-volume street had much more foot traffic.
○ Reducing car presence an easy “sell” to merchants now. (Roberts).
○ Schmoozing important (Whyte 1988)
○ Civility and anonymity have a role in building fabric. [Carter] But beware paralysis: Kitty Genovese (1964, wikipedia) & 2-yr-old child runover in China
○ “The best way to handle the problem of undesirables is to make a place attractive to everyone else.”[Whyte 1980, slide63]

slide 13

The Role of Automobiles and Traffic

○ Cars are source of noise that reduces “ears” function; also grime that soils clothes, shoes.
○ Most retailers assume their better customers come by car and over-accommodate them; stores are over-sized, set back from roads.
○ Cars represent the privatization of public space. It also insulates the occupants from sensing the negative impacts.

Slide 14

Children & the Elderly: Freedom for drivers = loss of independence for non-drivers

○ UK children, 1970-1990, experienced loss of freedom to “roam” from age 6 to age 11 (Hillman).
○ A child’s ability to detect direction in hearing and to fathom the “hurriedness” of traffic is poor (Sandels).
○ As road speeds and incivility have increased, seniors feeling stress and curbing their time out.
○ Off-street parking and wide turning radii hurt walking.
○ Self-esteem/responsibility hurt by increase in being chaperoned more in early/later yrs.

Slide 15

Moving away from “personal” cars: I Left Pedestrian Advocacy in 2000 to Promote Carsharing

○ Removes the separation of vehicle and pedestrian sections of street, signs, signals
○ Removes the “rights-of-way” for some travelers to avoid false-sense-of-security.
○ Result: drivers have to slow down to truly interact with other users, e.g. at traffic circles
○ Outcome: significant reduction in injuries and deaths, increase in walking and cycling and transit use

slide 17

Naked Streets/Carsharing Will Bring Major Shift in Street Culture

○ No off-street parking lots (freeing land for neighbourhood balancing/mixing land uses).
○ Major shift to other modes.
○ People will again chose to live close to work (at least for one income; and near good transit connection for other).
○ Safer streets will allow children to walk to school, parks; seniors to walk to shopping.
○ Personal and municipal expenditures will drop as cost/trip drop precipitously.

Slide 18

Measuring “eyes” and “ears”: The same as “walkability”?

Factors
○ The number of eyes/ears
○ The length of time they are out there
○ How much of the mind free to ‘mind’ them?
○ Watchers and “watchees” (kids in latter)
○ Features that can block views and mask sounds (especially traffic for latter)?
○ Factoring in distractions (e.g., reading a book, talking on the phone)

slide 19

The Challenges of Measuring

○ Pedestrians: count total time, whether walking or stationary (standing/leaning or sitting). Also spatial and temporal distribution
○ Drivers: Their time on the street as percentage of total trip x .25 of pedestrian’s attention
○ Passengers: count at a fraction of the driver’s attention (boredom, hard to see out)
○ Those living/working with potential view (see next)

slide 20

Measuring the Contribution of Viewing from Inside Buildings: To watch or not to watch

○ Opportunity: windows facing street, minimal window coverings, height of first floor (views from rear of it can be useless)
○ What is worth watching outside – are there “watchees? (And are watchers willing to be “watchees”)
○ “Ears” play important role in alerting the “eyes” to a worthy outside event or situation
○ The amount of time scheduled for outside chores/routines, e.g, gardening, sweeping, getting the mail.

Slide 21

Using Video to Collect Data: William “Holly” Whyte a Pioneer

○ Whyte introduced video as tool in his PBS show (and book) The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces (summarized decades of research in City: Rediscovering the Centre (1988)
○ Today, video is far more common, thanks to being cheaper, to the Internet being video friendly, and to software to extract data.
○ Video is also part of society’s eyes, and its accumulative record can inform our minds.
○ Video output also possible with modelling programs of future development.

Slide 22

Approaches That Have Failed: Keep our “eyes” on the objective: small scale, short trips

○ “Demand” for each mode can be predicted from plans to determine traffic (then re-run after varying values for parking, transit, and mix of land uses).
○ The pedestrian paths can be added at inception, rather than waiting a year for ruts to be worn in through use.
○ “Eyes”/”ears” indicators should be able to be outputs of such models. (Links to real estate, e.g. walkscore.com)

○ Despite several high towers and continuous street-orientation, it has few “eyes”; higher income on one side; low income on the other; former group shops downtown or suburbs.
○ Most shops are for local needs (five pharmacies), but only one coffee shop
○ Reconstruction of street scheduled for 2012-2013. Street will have new look.
○ Business association I worked for didn’t want to work to legitimize, so agreed to ask to be “absorbed” by business association to immediate west: Downtown Rideau Business Improvement Area (most merchants don’t understand “Eyes” principles).